Extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis for abdominopelvic surgery: Development and evaluation of a risk‐stratified patient decision aid to facilitate shared decision making

Extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis is used to decrease risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after surgery but may increase the risk of bleeding. The decision to complete a course of extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis can be challenging. The objective of this study was to develop an acceptable pa...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis 2022-11, Vol.6 (8), p.e12831, Article e12831
Hauptverfasser: Ivankovic, Victoria, McAlpine, Kristen, Delic, Edita, Carrier, Marc, Stacey, Dawn, Auer, Rebecca C.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 8
container_start_page e12831
container_title Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis
container_volume 6
creator Ivankovic, Victoria
McAlpine, Kristen
Delic, Edita
Carrier, Marc
Stacey, Dawn
Auer, Rebecca C.
description Extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis is used to decrease risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after surgery but may increase the risk of bleeding. The decision to complete a course of extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis can be challenging. The objective of this study was to develop an acceptable patient decision aid (PtDA) to facilitate shared decision making for the use of extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis following major abdominal surgery. An evidence‐based, risk‐stratified PtDA was created. The evidence on benefits and harms of a 28‐day postoperative course of low‐molecular‐weight heparin (LMWH) versus in‐hospital prophylaxis only were synthesized. Outcomes included minor bleeding, major bleeding, clinically significant VTE, and fatal VTE. Risks were calculated and reported by Caprini score. Alpha testing of the PtDA draft with various stakeholders was performed using a 10‐question survey to assess acceptability of the PtDA with patients, thrombosis experts, and surgeons. The primary outcome was the acceptability of the PtDA. Acceptability testing was performed with 11 patients, 11 thrombosis experts, and 11 surgeons. Most responders felt the language on the PtDA was easy to follow (28/33, 85%), and that the information was well balanced between management options (9/11 [82%] patients; 17/21 [80%] clinicians). Most patients (9/11, 82%) and clinicians (18/22, 82%) believed it would be a useful clinical tool, and were satisfied with the overall quality of the PtDA (27/33, 82%). A risk‐stratified, evidence‐based PtDA was created to facilitate shared decision making for the use of extended‐duration LMWH following major abdominal surgery. This clinical tool was acceptable with patients and physicians and is available at https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/decaids.html.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/rth2.12831
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9663316</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S2475037922024311</els_id><sourcerecordid>2738190415</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c451t-3a625cd852c055f898f0d687533c00b11a0ab7caddbfa342f5a9911330a476773</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkttqFTEUhgdRbKm98QEk4I0Iu-YwmYMXQqn1AAVv9DqsSdbsSTszGZPM0H3nI_gkPpRPYsZdN1WEQBbk42OtrD_LnjJ6xijlr3zs-BnjlWAPsmOel3JDRVk_vFcfZachXNMEU56OfJwdiULUZS3Ecfbj8jbiaND8_PbdzB6idSOJnXdD4ybvpm7Xw60NpHWeQGPcYEc3Yb9YTcLst-h3r8lbXLB304BjJDAaggv0897kWgLE23CT9CGu-taiIVMqVtqgtmHlwBoSHWlB295GiEhCBz6RB2KAGztun2SPWugDnt7dJ9mXd5efLz5srj69_3hxfrXRuWRxI6DgUptKck2lbKu6aqkpqlIKoSltGAMKTanBmKYFkfNWQl0zJgSFvCzKUpxkb_beaW4GNDo166FXk7cD-J1yYNXfL6Pt1NYtqi4KIViRBC_uBN59nTFENdigse9hRDcHxUtRsZrmTCb0-T_otZv9mMZTvOK8ZJXIWaJe7intXQge20MzjKo1CWpNgvqdhAQ_u9_-Af2z9wTkewDTJy4WvQo6bUSjsR51VMbZ_3l_AT5xx9o</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2822718341</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis for abdominopelvic surgery: Development and evaluation of a risk‐stratified patient decision aid to facilitate shared decision making</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Ivankovic, Victoria ; McAlpine, Kristen ; Delic, Edita ; Carrier, Marc ; Stacey, Dawn ; Auer, Rebecca C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Ivankovic, Victoria ; McAlpine, Kristen ; Delic, Edita ; Carrier, Marc ; Stacey, Dawn ; Auer, Rebecca C.</creatorcontrib><description>Extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis is used to decrease risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after surgery but may increase the risk of bleeding. The decision to complete a course of extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis can be challenging. The objective of this study was to develop an acceptable patient decision aid (PtDA) to facilitate shared decision making for the use of extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis following major abdominal surgery. An evidence‐based, risk‐stratified PtDA was created. The evidence on benefits and harms of a 28‐day postoperative course of low‐molecular‐weight heparin (LMWH) versus in‐hospital prophylaxis only were synthesized. Outcomes included minor bleeding, major bleeding, clinically significant VTE, and fatal VTE. Risks were calculated and reported by Caprini score. Alpha testing of the PtDA draft with various stakeholders was performed using a 10‐question survey to assess acceptability of the PtDA with patients, thrombosis experts, and surgeons. The primary outcome was the acceptability of the PtDA. Acceptability testing was performed with 11 patients, 11 thrombosis experts, and 11 surgeons. Most responders felt the language on the PtDA was easy to follow (28/33, 85%), and that the information was well balanced between management options (9/11 [82%] patients; 17/21 [80%] clinicians). Most patients (9/11, 82%) and clinicians (18/22, 82%) believed it would be a useful clinical tool, and were satisfied with the overall quality of the PtDA (27/33, 82%). A risk‐stratified, evidence‐based PtDA was created to facilitate shared decision making for the use of extended‐duration LMWH following major abdominal surgery. This clinical tool was acceptable with patients and physicians and is available at https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/decaids.html.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2475-0379</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2475-0379</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/rth2.12831</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36397933</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Abdomen ; Abdominal surgery ; Asymptomatic ; Clinical decision making ; Clinical medicine ; decision aid ; Decision making ; decision support techniques ; Literature reviews ; Original ; Patients ; Perceptions ; Surgeons ; surgery ; Thromboembolism ; Thrombosis ; venous thromboembolism</subject><ispartof>Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2022-11, Vol.6 (8), p.e12831, Article e12831</ispartof><rights>2022 The Authors. Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH).</rights><rights>2022. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2022 The Authors. published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH).</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c451t-3a625cd852c055f898f0d687533c00b11a0ab7caddbfa342f5a9911330a476773</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c451t-3a625cd852c055f898f0d687533c00b11a0ab7caddbfa342f5a9911330a476773</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5549-9123 ; 0000-0001-8296-2972</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9663316/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9663316/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36397933$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ivankovic, Victoria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McAlpine, Kristen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delic, Edita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carrier, Marc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stacey, Dawn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Auer, Rebecca C.</creatorcontrib><title>Extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis for abdominopelvic surgery: Development and evaluation of a risk‐stratified patient decision aid to facilitate shared decision making</title><title>Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis</title><addtitle>Res Pract Thromb Haemost</addtitle><description>Extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis is used to decrease risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after surgery but may increase the risk of bleeding. The decision to complete a course of extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis can be challenging. The objective of this study was to develop an acceptable patient decision aid (PtDA) to facilitate shared decision making for the use of extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis following major abdominal surgery. An evidence‐based, risk‐stratified PtDA was created. The evidence on benefits and harms of a 28‐day postoperative course of low‐molecular‐weight heparin (LMWH) versus in‐hospital prophylaxis only were synthesized. Outcomes included minor bleeding, major bleeding, clinically significant VTE, and fatal VTE. Risks were calculated and reported by Caprini score. Alpha testing of the PtDA draft with various stakeholders was performed using a 10‐question survey to assess acceptability of the PtDA with patients, thrombosis experts, and surgeons. The primary outcome was the acceptability of the PtDA. Acceptability testing was performed with 11 patients, 11 thrombosis experts, and 11 surgeons. Most responders felt the language on the PtDA was easy to follow (28/33, 85%), and that the information was well balanced between management options (9/11 [82%] patients; 17/21 [80%] clinicians). Most patients (9/11, 82%) and clinicians (18/22, 82%) believed it would be a useful clinical tool, and were satisfied with the overall quality of the PtDA (27/33, 82%). A risk‐stratified, evidence‐based PtDA was created to facilitate shared decision making for the use of extended‐duration LMWH following major abdominal surgery. This clinical tool was acceptable with patients and physicians and is available at https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/decaids.html.</description><subject>Abdomen</subject><subject>Abdominal surgery</subject><subject>Asymptomatic</subject><subject>Clinical decision making</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>decision aid</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>decision support techniques</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Perceptions</subject><subject>Surgeons</subject><subject>surgery</subject><subject>Thromboembolism</subject><subject>Thrombosis</subject><subject>venous thromboembolism</subject><issn>2475-0379</issn><issn>2475-0379</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNptkttqFTEUhgdRbKm98QEk4I0Iu-YwmYMXQqn1AAVv9DqsSdbsSTszGZPM0H3nI_gkPpRPYsZdN1WEQBbk42OtrD_LnjJ6xijlr3zs-BnjlWAPsmOel3JDRVk_vFcfZachXNMEU56OfJwdiULUZS3Ecfbj8jbiaND8_PbdzB6idSOJnXdD4ybvpm7Xw60NpHWeQGPcYEc3Yb9YTcLst-h3r8lbXLB304BjJDAaggv0897kWgLE23CT9CGu-taiIVMqVtqgtmHlwBoSHWlB295GiEhCBz6RB2KAGztun2SPWugDnt7dJ9mXd5efLz5srj69_3hxfrXRuWRxI6DgUptKck2lbKu6aqkpqlIKoSltGAMKTanBmKYFkfNWQl0zJgSFvCzKUpxkb_beaW4GNDo166FXk7cD-J1yYNXfL6Pt1NYtqi4KIViRBC_uBN59nTFENdigse9hRDcHxUtRsZrmTCb0-T_otZv9mMZTvOK8ZJXIWaJe7intXQge20MzjKo1CWpNgvqdhAQ_u9_-Af2z9wTkewDTJy4WvQo6bUSjsR51VMbZ_3l_AT5xx9o</recordid><startdate>20221101</startdate><enddate>20221101</enddate><creator>Ivankovic, Victoria</creator><creator>McAlpine, Kristen</creator><creator>Delic, Edita</creator><creator>Carrier, Marc</creator><creator>Stacey, Dawn</creator><creator>Auer, Rebecca C.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><general>John Wiley and Sons Inc</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5549-9123</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8296-2972</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20221101</creationdate><title>Extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis for abdominopelvic surgery: Development and evaluation of a risk‐stratified patient decision aid to facilitate shared decision making</title><author>Ivankovic, Victoria ; McAlpine, Kristen ; Delic, Edita ; Carrier, Marc ; Stacey, Dawn ; Auer, Rebecca C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c451t-3a625cd852c055f898f0d687533c00b11a0ab7caddbfa342f5a9911330a476773</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Abdomen</topic><topic>Abdominal surgery</topic><topic>Asymptomatic</topic><topic>Clinical decision making</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>decision aid</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>decision support techniques</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Perceptions</topic><topic>Surgeons</topic><topic>surgery</topic><topic>Thromboembolism</topic><topic>Thrombosis</topic><topic>venous thromboembolism</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ivankovic, Victoria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McAlpine, Kristen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delic, Edita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carrier, Marc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stacey, Dawn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Auer, Rebecca C.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ivankovic, Victoria</au><au>McAlpine, Kristen</au><au>Delic, Edita</au><au>Carrier, Marc</au><au>Stacey, Dawn</au><au>Auer, Rebecca C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis for abdominopelvic surgery: Development and evaluation of a risk‐stratified patient decision aid to facilitate shared decision making</atitle><jtitle>Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis</jtitle><addtitle>Res Pract Thromb Haemost</addtitle><date>2022-11-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>6</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>e12831</spage><pages>e12831-</pages><artnum>e12831</artnum><issn>2475-0379</issn><eissn>2475-0379</eissn><abstract>Extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis is used to decrease risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after surgery but may increase the risk of bleeding. The decision to complete a course of extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis can be challenging. The objective of this study was to develop an acceptable patient decision aid (PtDA) to facilitate shared decision making for the use of extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis following major abdominal surgery. An evidence‐based, risk‐stratified PtDA was created. The evidence on benefits and harms of a 28‐day postoperative course of low‐molecular‐weight heparin (LMWH) versus in‐hospital prophylaxis only were synthesized. Outcomes included minor bleeding, major bleeding, clinically significant VTE, and fatal VTE. Risks were calculated and reported by Caprini score. Alpha testing of the PtDA draft with various stakeholders was performed using a 10‐question survey to assess acceptability of the PtDA with patients, thrombosis experts, and surgeons. The primary outcome was the acceptability of the PtDA. Acceptability testing was performed with 11 patients, 11 thrombosis experts, and 11 surgeons. Most responders felt the language on the PtDA was easy to follow (28/33, 85%), and that the information was well balanced between management options (9/11 [82%] patients; 17/21 [80%] clinicians). Most patients (9/11, 82%) and clinicians (18/22, 82%) believed it would be a useful clinical tool, and were satisfied with the overall quality of the PtDA (27/33, 82%). A risk‐stratified, evidence‐based PtDA was created to facilitate shared decision making for the use of extended‐duration LMWH following major abdominal surgery. This clinical tool was acceptable with patients and physicians and is available at https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/decaids.html.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>36397933</pmid><doi>10.1002/rth2.12831</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5549-9123</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8296-2972</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2475-0379
ispartof Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2022-11, Vol.6 (8), p.e12831, Article e12831
issn 2475-0379
2475-0379
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9663316
source Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Abdomen
Abdominal surgery
Asymptomatic
Clinical decision making
Clinical medicine
decision aid
Decision making
decision support techniques
Literature reviews
Original
Patients
Perceptions
Surgeons
surgery
Thromboembolism
Thrombosis
venous thromboembolism
title Extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis for abdominopelvic surgery: Development and evaluation of a risk‐stratified patient decision aid to facilitate shared decision making
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T21%3A40%3A46IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Extended%E2%80%90duration%20thromboprophylaxis%20for%20abdominopelvic%20surgery:%20Development%20and%20evaluation%20of%20a%20risk%E2%80%90stratified%20patient%20decision%20aid%20to%20facilitate%20shared%20decision%20making&rft.jtitle=Research%20and%20practice%20in%20thrombosis%20and%20haemostasis&rft.au=Ivankovic,%20Victoria&rft.date=2022-11-01&rft.volume=6&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=e12831&rft.pages=e12831-&rft.artnum=e12831&rft.issn=2475-0379&rft.eissn=2475-0379&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/rth2.12831&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2738190415%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2822718341&rft_id=info:pmid/36397933&rft_els_id=S2475037922024311&rfr_iscdi=true